As counter-arguments pour in, antievolutionist William Dembski's arguments continue to contract around him. Here zosdad envisions an imaginary dialogue between Dembski and an evolutionary scientist to illustrate this process.

Is historical knowledge more reliable than other kinds of scientific knowledge? Is evolution inherently less certain than other facts about the world? Daniel Harper illustrates that creationist standards for evidence can deny well-established historical facts just as easily as they can well-established scientific theories.

The appearance of bacteria with enzymes that can digest nylon oligomers, a completely artificial polymer that did not exist on Earth until a few decades ago, is a clear example of evolution in action. Ian Musgrave responds to creationist claims about these novel enzymes.

Expressing frustration with a creationist who claims to have witnessed an act of blatant scientific fraud but would not say where or when it took place or who the scientists were, Charles C. explains how to defend a position and have a rational, productive conversation with other people.

Larry Moran argues that the splitting of one species into many branches, rather than the slow change of one species into one other species, and the differential survival of those daughter species is an important part of macroevolutionary change.

DS provides an account of a conversation with a young, intelligent, devout Muslim who became a doctor in America after starting from humble means in Pakistan, and concludes that American policy can and must do far more to reach out to people like him. (WARNING: This post is highly political.)

John McKendry investigates whether Jesus or Paul either personally endorsed a creationist interpretation of the Bible or taught that such an interpretation was an essential component of Christian faith.

It is a little-known fact that Civic Biology, the textbook whose teaching of evolution was at issue in the infamous 1925 Scopes trial, was openly racist. Does this mean that Clarence Darrow and the defenders of Darwin were also, by extension, racists? Mitchell Coffey answers that question by investigating what happened in the trial's aftermath.

A transcript of a talk given by John Wilkins, in which the good philosopher seeks out the origins of intelligent design in classical Greek philosophy and argues that the designer referred to can only be a supernatural deity.